Tags: US | drone | terror | attacks

U.N. Warning to United States Favors Terrorists

Friday, 30 Oct 2009 04:22 PM

By Steve Emerson

In a little-noticed but critical piece of news, the BBC reports that Philip Alston, the U.N.'s special rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, has warned the United States against striking terrorists from unmanned drones.

"My concern is that these drones, these Predators, are being operated in a framework which may well violate international humanitarian law and international human rights law," Alston told the BBC.

"The onus is really on the government of the United States to reveal more about the ways in which it makes sure that arbitrary executions, extrajudicial executions, are not in fact being carried out through the use of these weapons."

Alston, a professor at New York University, also has stated that the U.S. government and the CIA need to explain how such measures are legal in the first place. The previous explanation from the government clarified that the United States uses a framework to respond to unlawful killings (should they occur), and that it did not believe that the U.N. General Assembly and U.N. Human Rights Council had any role in relation to killings carried out during an armed conflict.

Alston rejected these arguments, calling them "untenable," and demanded that the United States furnish proof of the legality of its actions in wartime circumstances.

The weight of such a demand from a high-ranking U.N. official is astounding.

Rather than evaluate the United States' wartime actions against a terrorist entity that is oppressing millions of Afghanis and murdering thousands of civilians in indiscriminate bombings, the U.N. is forcing the United States to justify unmanned strikes against high ranking al-Qaida leaders.

Some drone attacks have missed the marks, and civilians tragically have been killed. However, they've also been among the most effective means of killing al-Qaida leaders and keeping the terrorist organization off balance.

It is difficult to see how this wouldn't give terrorists the upper hand, forcing the United States to pick between running afoul of the U.N. Human Rights Council, or endangering the lives of tens of thousands of troops and civilians.

© 2015 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Around the Web
Join the Newsmax Community
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Zip Code:
Privacy: We never share your email.
Hot Topics
Follow Newsmax
Like us
on Facebook
Follow us
on Twitter
Add us
on Google Plus
Around the Web
Top Stories
You May Also Like

Oxford University Press Bans Pork From Books

Thursday, 15 Jan 2015 10:00 AM

Oxford University Press (OUP) has banned authors from depicting pork-related products in their children's books in an ap . . .

Victims' Attorney: PA Supported Terror Attacks

Wednesday, 14 Jan 2015 11:08 AM

Killing civilians was "standard operating procedure" for the Palestine Liberation Organization and Palestinian Authority . . .

Saudis Lash Blogger for 'Insult' to Islam

Friday, 09 Jan 2015 12:43 PM

This has been a horrible week for violence waged in defense of Islam. It's not a great week for those who insist this vi . . .

Most Commented

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
©  Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved